Unregistered, as a new member your first 5 posts will be subject to moderation.
So if your post is submitted successfully, but does not show up immediately, please be patient, as it may take some time for a moderator to approve it.
Please don't double post.

Thanks I was wondering about the 'misspelling' and why such a word made it to the English vocabulary

On topic: I think he is. But as others said, I have never heard of the parameters of his relationships or if the women are/were allowed to have relationships outside this arrangement. Therefore I don't know for sure what kind of poly he is living there

And in regard to the variety of poly: I stumbled about all the different forms quite early when I searched for clues. So many different ways of actually living the same core idea ... there was one thread where we discussed this variety and someone talked about something like the Kinsey scale in regard to poly. I think this idea isn't that far off the mark. There are some forms of polyamory that are closer to the monogamous structure and some that fit in with the more general open relationship models. Why not? Just like my father phrased it: "You have to get along with this, as long as you are happy, everything is fine."

Did you miss the mod note? As I read it, AutumnalTone meant all of us, together, should be a bit more civil. I would hazard a guess that does, indeed, mean all of us.

Actually, my point was that you aren't necessarily going to like what others have to say and it is entirely OK that they say it. What BG posted there does not violate guidelines *and is perfectly OK.*

That you don't like it is also OK. I suspect that you're conflating "civil" with "nice." The two are not synonymous, at least as regarding the site guidelines. Mocking an idea offered up is equivalent to saying "That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard," which is perfectly OK on these boards. You may take umbrage at somebody mocking an idea you like. They're allowed to mock that idea, nonetheless.

You are always welcome to ignore any other member. There is no requirement that you read posts from anybody else and certainly no requirement that you respond to any particular post.

__________________
When speaking of various forms of non-monogamy...it ain't poly if you're just fucking around.

While polyamory, open relationships, and swinging are all distinctly different approaches to non-monogamy, they are not mutually exlusive. Folks can, and some do, engage in more than one of them at a time--and it's all good.

It is interesting from an anthropological point of view to see just how much thread-jacking the normal public discourse causes. I feel like there is a whole other subject going on about mockery and moderation and civil behavior, when I just wanted to read about opinions on Hugh Hefner.

Ah well, at this point I'm contributing to the discourse too.

Reminds me of a bit in one of my all time favorite films, THE LIFE OF BRIAN, where a dozen or so members of a cult rebellion are just sitting around talking about what they need to do to save Brian (thought to be the Messiah). Saying things like "What we ought to do, is get off our bums and get out there and do something about it!" to which others who are sitting down respond, "yeah! I agree. We should stop talking about it endlessly, and get motivated and band together and go help Brian!" to which others sitting down say, "That's right! And we should do that before anything else we do." Again others than chime in to say, "Precisely! We must get up off our butts on a first priority basis and get out there and do something about it all!" Everyone says "Yeah!..." etc etc

And as you can guess this goes on for infinitum and they never actually rescue Brian. That's what letting people talk endlessly about nothing in these threads feels like to me. It's utterly useless, self-serving, self-validating, wasting of a valuable place to talk about the actual subjects of the threads. I mean I wouldn't want to discriminate but some of these chaps ought to be singled out and done something about. As I see, someone has already been reprimanded, and I think that's a step in the right direction.

NOW, regarding Hugh Hefner, on the one hand I do indeed he is a Polyamorist, but the following is worth noting at this point, when you are putting two and two together:
- He doesn't really have sex with them anymore. He just watches. His back is too bad, and the viagra he used to take to be ready caused high blood pressure and nearly cost him a stroke.
- He doesn't really attach himself to the girls very much. They are accoutrements. He's always happy because any bad behavior is reprimanded with either a warning, withholding weekly allowance, or being asked to leave his home permanently and later easily replaced by any of the girls waiting to make a big impression and be his sidekick.

- He doesn't really have sex with them anymore. He just watches. His back is too bad, and the viagra he used to take to be ready caused high blood pressure and nearly cost him a stroke.
- He doesn't really attach himself to the girls very much. They are accoutrements. He's always happy because any bad behavior is reprimanded with either a warning, withholding weekly allowance, or being asked to leave his home permanently and later easily replaced by any of the girls waiting to make a big impression and be his sidekick.

I'm actually not genuinely disputing anything you have said. the fact that they're disposible makes it a weird situation.

Just had to point out...sex doesn't have to be the pinacle of it being a poly relationship. My fDP and i don't have sex, we're still in a [poly]relationship.

Just had to point out...sex doesn't have to be the pinacle of it being a poly relationship. My fDP and i don't have sex, we're still in a [poly]relationship.

Right, I'm saying the fact that he is with them without sex shows it's more than sex. Whether it's love, the second point I mentioned goes towards that. I think even if you find someone disposable, it could still be love. That could just be the way you setup your boundaries. Thick skinned or something like that.

Location: Ping-ponging around Europe, trying to get a publishing concern off the ground

Posts: 718

I haven't got the time now to read through everybody's comments, basically I came here because I'm checking out pliglet (I think that I'm in love...) and chasing up threads that she's commented on, but I'll throw in my 2p / 2c:

a) I agree totally that sex isn't the most important aspect of poly.

b) Hef is rich and famous. Also (I suppose) the boss of some of these women. I have to wonder how many of his companions are with him for reasons nothing to do with sex OR love.

c) It's my own little bugbear, but is Hef happy about the women having other partners [apart from voyeur-pleasing "lez-sex"] aside from him? If not, my take is that he isn't poly, he's got a harem.

I find this thread amusing because after all the talk on this forum about not judging people who aren't here to give their side of the story, here is a thread completely dedicated to judging someone without having them here to give their side of the story. If someone could explain to me why it is beneficial to do that, I might be inclined to take this thread seriously.

ETA: if a poll could be added to this thread, it might generate more meaningful data. Bar graphs and charts provide an attractive visual element.